Good Choice, you will enjoy it although it will distort people on the sides too (easier to work with). One issue with an aspherical lens is that it does actually distort but instead of making your straight lines curvy, it keystones, making cubes seem like trapezoid shapes...

Very good information, Velocity Stop. Especially the two photos of the big Silver thing with both lenses; I can really see the difference in distortion type.

I have pretty much made up my mind to go with the 10.5 Fisheye for several reasone: small size, fast aperture, super wide angle of view & ablility to correct distortion in software. I know it won't autofocus on my D40, but I can live with that.

I've borrowed a 10-24 several times and I can't seem to love it. I especially dislike the distortion of people near the frame edges and it is quite heavy for just "walking around".

I think I will try the Fisheye first and maybe add an UltraWide Zoom later.

NSXType-R said:
I agree, the 10.5 fisheye is a very specialized lens, you might want to rent it a couple of times but it's not all that practical in everyday use. You'll get bored of that look quickly.

Not necessarily It is how you use it... I use mine very other day and Ill use it for street photography too. It is about getting the technique down and using basic photography principles to get great shots. While you can get a cool shot pointing it at anything composition is more crucial with this lens than even a wide like the 14-24mm

^ I didn't adjust the distortion on any of the shots - first one is cropped on the sides some. And regarding getting close - you can almost touch something with the lens on the fisheye - I think it focuses as close as around inch. Definitely can get some very unique perspectives from it.

If you are asking then the 10-24mm, 12-24 (nikon or tokina). I agree with tcole1983 - It is a specialty lens. I have a 15mm fisheye that I pull out maybe 10 times a year at most.

You can fix distortion but fisheyes are designed to have the distortion. That's what makes them great. To buy one planning to fix distortion defeats the purpose in owning one in the first place unless you have specific needs. Velocity stop showed some great examples above, but you can see where the software had to pull the distortion out.

One thing that no one has said either is how close you have to get with fisheyes, I mean really close -less than 2ft, for many 'cool' shots.

I own the Nikon 10.5 fisheye and the Tokina 11-16 ultra wide angle. Both are awesome lenses, but I generally use them for totally different shots. Both lenses will distort, but in different ways. The fisheye will bend in a circular shape around the center both vertical and horizontal while the wide angle will stretch on the sides.

Fisheye - great for shots inside of things or where you get close to something and have the background wrap around it. I do a lot of car photography and love the fisheye on car engine bays and interior shots but unless it is an open wheel car, it is very hard to pull off a good looking shot on the outside with this lens. Don't let the 10.5 fool you, it actually has a significantly wider field of view than a wide angle of the same focal length - I have actually switched to it over my Tokina before just to get a wider shot. If you are able to keep the main lines in a shot in the center, you can get away with using it even more.

Wide angle - great all around landscape lens and for architectural shots or anything else that you have a lot of straight lines that might look really bad being bent by the fisheye. You do have to be careful with it and watch the edges especially if using it on people or you will end up stretching body parts in a really weird way.

Nikon 10.5mm Fisheye (no adjustment to distortion - first shot was cropped on the sides):

Tokina 11-16mm (notice how much wider the fisheye above is in comparison to the wide angle below):

I would go for the 10.5mm (thats what I did) as its main pro for me was the f2.8 for extreme closeups (narrow dof at close ranges) and low light.

However If you don't know whether to choose between these 2 the 10.5 is probably not for you (the distortion may drive you crazy). What I use my 10.5 mm for is extreme sports so it works great but for most portraits and landscape shots the fisheye isn't all that useful (for most at least I will use it from time to time and fix in pshop. It does take skill to use the 10.5mm as it is not the easiest shooter.

Personally the fisheye lenses are very specialized and are rarely used lenses. It might look cool every once in a while, but I doubt most want all their wide angle shots to look like that. Personally I wouldn't even think about the 10.5 lens just for that reason. I mean unless you really have a plan for it, how many people really want pictures with that type of distortion?

I own the Nikon 10.5mm fisheye and a Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8. The fisheye is a great lens, but the Tokina is even better if you're looking for a super sharp UWA that has very little distortion. The 10.5 fisheye is slightly sharper wide open, but the difference is very minimal. They are both super sharp. I would skip the Nikon 10-24 and go with the Tokina 11-16, it's got a wider apertute(f/2.8) and is a better lens. Tokina is the ONLY third party lens i would buy. It's quality is right on-par with Nikon. Get the 10.5 fisheye later down the road if you absolutly need a fisheye.